2006-03-09 Tplanning_director - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

investigate and protect them before any subdivision approval that is granted. There are three major subdivision projects right now in Kau. I can tell you native Hawaiian rights will be affected by these projects. Already in the Planning Department files there are letters, or at least one letter, by folks whose rights are going to be impacted. You need to make it clear to the Planning Director and to the Council that you believe the Subdivision Code should have a specific explicit requirement that native Hawaiian rights shall be investigated and protected. More specifically, the developer must submit information when they submit their plan on native Hawaiian rights that are exercised in the area that is proposed to be subdivided or, and discussion of how those rights may be impacted. Second or third issue, so the Department of Environmental Management should be explicitly referenced. Native Hawaiian rights should be investigated and protected. Thirdly is the issue of agricultural lands. Chris and I and Ivan have a completely different interpretation of the State Land Use Law, which to me is quite frustrating. But, to me, the legislativehistoryandthelanguagearequiteclear,thatthelanduselawprohibitsnonagricultural uses of agricultural lands. That includes residential housing construction. Thats what Judge Ibarra ruled. And, you know, I can go through a litany of the law and show you where it is in the law and where it is in the legislative history. The County has turned a blind eye to the problem regarding residential construction on Ag land. Its a very, very difficult issue to address after subdivision approval has been granted. Its not hard to do beforehand. And what Id like to ask you to do is ask the Planning Director to come up with language that requires the Planning Director to insure that any subdivision of agricultural land is commercially viable. If as, for example, was proposed at Keopuka which is adjacent to Kelakekua Bay, and much of it is covered in lava, I think most would concede that it would be very difficult to have commercially viable agriculture there. If someone comes in with an application to subdivide it and they cannot demonstrate that it is economically viable to have agriculture there, then it may not be subdivided. This gets to a major premise of the land use law, that was land thats in agricultural district is not there just there for agriculture, its there as a growth control measure. Land that is premature to be subdivided to be developed is put in the Ag district. That is clearly established in the land use law. So if someone comes in with a project say at Keopuka and it is not agricultural, then it may not be subdivided. End of story. What the applicant needs to do is apply to reclassify the land before the Land Use Commission and come to the Council, rather than avoiding oversight by the County Council, the Land Use Commission, and the Planning Commission. What is happening now is projects in the agricultural district are being subdivided without any oversight by the County Council or this Commission. Youre being circumvented; and this has to stop. And the way to make it stop is to have explicit language in the Subdivision Code that says that any subdivision of agricultural land shall include a farm plan to demonstrate that the subdivision is a genuine agricultural subdivision. The fourth major issue I want to deal with is essentially found, and I dont have the latest version of the bill, of the amendments to the Subdivision Code but its found, in my draft, at least, on . page 6And thats paragraph (e) to Section 23-62. What this provision said, let me read it to you, The directors deferral of a subdivision for further review under subsection (a) constitutes an acceptance of the contents of the preliminary plat as submitted, and the directors issuance of a tentative and final subdivision approval is valid despite the failure of the preliminary plat to include all the information specified in sections, basically, 23-63 to 23-66. If you read this language properly, what it does is it changes all the mandatory informational requirements in the subdivision application to discretionary. That is very troubling. What it means is a developer 5EXHIBIT D